freeidaho

Chills, Thanks for the idea ! ! ! But I'm not proposing an exclusive area for IDPA members. I believe well thougt out input from anyone and everyone is a great thing. Cross pollination is a good thing. What I am asking is if IDPA, IDPA HQ and its founders shouldn't get the modicum of respect that we allow any poster here on the forum. I can't call one of you posters stupid, or call your ideas dumb, but it is fair game to do the same to Bill Wilson, Joyce, HQ staff, etc. Just seems inconsistent to me, and I can't see any downside to a change. Just a thought, Ken Reed

Duane, Good rules indeed. One of those was one of my posts, and I should have been more mellow. Sorry. I find it interesting, that one can use any and all of those words, and worse, when describing IDPA, IDPA HQ, Bill or Joyce. Sounds like a double standard to me. This double standard maybe what starts alot of these wild threads in the first place. Shouldn't the same respect shown to an anonymous poster that may do nothing for our sport be afforded to the group that founded the sport? Just a thought for you moderators to kick around... Ken Reed

Mark, I can't recall where I read it but I read it recently, the new SOI materials are out. Ken Reed

Jim, Indeed, if it were my sport, I would not have the go to cover to reload rule. I agree with they guy that said he believed that it is an administrative rule, like one knee down. I've been shot at, and sometimes you run like hell, and sometimes you shoot back. In the case of IDPA we always shoot back, until we run the gun dry. However, I didn't mortgage my business and house to start a shooting sport. I haven't poured 10 years of my life into making it a success. So I will happily shoot the sport of someone who has, and make the best of it. That brings up another point. It seems that there are two camps in IDPA, those that make the best of it, and those that try their best to make the worst of it. I'm glad you are in the former bucket. Take care. Ken Reed

Jim, everyone; With all due respect, and I really mean that, you are being a bit deceptive here. Vickers means shoot as much as you want to get good hits. It does not mean shoot as much as you want to get a perfectly timed reload. Everyone I know in IDPA is smart enough to know the difference, it is a simple concept. The rest is about personal integrity. It is a clearly written rule, and that is sufficient for most people. That it is tough to call, seems to make some folks think it isn't a rule. Go figure. By comparison, I guess that means cheating on ones wife, beating their kids, or stealing from the neighbors is okay, just because it is hard to detect. If you follow any dumper around for a whole match, you know like being squadded with them, you will indeed clearly see a pattern of convenient reloads preceeded by firing extra shots. Not extra shots on more difficult targets, or more shots on distant targets, but more shots when a reload would be really nice. It ain't rocket surgery. Those dumping and trying to explain it away, ain't fooling anyone. Shooters notice these things, and make mental notes. Hmm, guess I can't trust that guy as far as I can throw him, is what I think when I see it. We have two guys in our club that do it, the rest seem to get the rule just fine. Just $.02 cents from deep in the boonies in Idaho, maybe we see thing different here. Dunno. Ken Reed

Joe D, everyone; I'm not sure those things are worth all the anxst, but it is your stress to handle not mine. Bill is, who he is, just as you are, or I am. I have no idea what he thinks, or why he does what he does. My ESP has been broken since birth. Wish I could read minds like y'all. He has however appointed Robert Ray as a liason for all things IDPA. He posts and sometimes answers posts on other less hateful discussion groups. Like it or not, no HQ person is coming within a Texas mile of this discussion group. It is indeed that bad. So in a way people here continually demanding their pound of flesh, year after year are perpetuating the problem. The funny thing is that the empty mag thing has been explained about a billion times, by people that have actually been shot at and know that the last thing on your mind is counting rounds. Why that is not sufficient is beyond me. I don't mean to open up that war again, sorry. Not reloading in the open is a red herring. You saw the COF description, you correographed your little shooting dance, you should have left cover with enough rounds in the gun. If after all that, you misjudged, you should be within a step or two of cover anyway. Very few COFs that I have seen require more than the capacity of the gun when in the open, with the exception of revolvers. Revolvers shooters may have a real issue. The truth is IDPA is not going to be like the other shooting sports, and some people want to have a tantrum over it. Not directed at you specifically JoeD. Funny thing is you see many of the same issues on the USPSA part of BE.com. The difference is that people that don't shoot USPSA don't log in there and continually post "nanner nanner nanner, I told you your sport has issues." Again, not directed at you. Ken Reed

Looking forward to JoeD's shooting sport. After you have poured your money and your time into it, and made it successful for 10 years, just turn it over to someone else. Sounds like an unusual business plan to me. Seriously though, have you thought about IDSA or TSA? They were setup specifically to be better at the IDPA game. Of course you will note they are both privately owned corporations, just like IDPA. You will also note, they use mostly IDPA's rules with a few tweaks. Some more lenient, some way more restrictive. They have been so grandly successful you should be able to find a match on any given weekend, anywhere in the world. Ken Reed

I believe there is a difference between having an opinion and what goes on here at Brian's little byte of the net under IDPA. It seems that many that don't shoot IDPA are bent on ruining it for anyone else, and/or just stirring as much trouble as possible. That is not "having an opinion", that is "picking a fight." There seems to be way more "picking a fight" here, than "having an opinion." There seems to be way more condemnation and slander than discussing, learning and sharing. It is my belief that cutting out the picking a fight, condemnation and slander is what people mean when they aren't interested in the input from those that don't participate in the sport. Just a guess, Ken Reed

Okay, I gotta ask. What makes membership numbers of a privately held company available to a secret major internationally known competitor? Second, what happens to membership in the 4 or 5 years between rulebook revisions? Thanks, Ken Reed

Dan, and everyone; I'm truely sorry you guys have such issues with IDPA or your local club, or whatever your problems tend to be. I know lots of clubs that don't really have any issues, including my club here in Idaho. Here in Podunk, about half the shooters cross over between games, and we truely don't have any of the problems y'all do. Since some clubs do seem to have lots of reported issues, and shooters that either love to be miserable, or love to complain, or something, and some clubs don't, yet they are using the same rulebook, I wonder what the problems actually are. I don't have the answers, that is for sure..... and typing on the internet has rarely made things better. Have a good night! Ken Reed

Dan, Isn't the H&K allowed in ESP? Would a 2 minute change of guide rod, fix your 1911? Ken Reed

In the time I have been reading here, these are the changes that the "experts" have suggested: no tac reload no reload with retention allow speed reloads no cover calls, use fault lines no weight limit no limit on holsters no behind the center line for holsters or mags no two mags on the belt limit no prohibition on lightening slides no limit on modifications no 10 round limit on loading mags no scenario descriptions no limit on rounds in a COF string no limits on steel in a COF no tactical sequence allow air gunning allow pinned grip safeties no limit on barrel length, especially for revolvers allow porting no boxing of guns, i.e. no size limit if it is concealable, it is okay and last but not least, no FTDR There are probably a lot more, but these are the ones I could come up with in a few minutes of snooping around. Sounds like USPSA with vests to me. Ken Reed

Last I knew, the BoD was Bill, Joyce and John Sale. In the distant past it also included Ken Hackathorn, and Tom Givens. Spelling may be poor on these names. Ken Reed

Good question. Do any of y'all follow discussion groups where concealed carry is discussed, and shooting games are not discussed. If not, reading them is instructional. People on these carry specific groups are not trying to conceal an STI, they are all the time talking about how J frames, or Glock 19s are too heavy, or too bulky, or too hard to conceal, and they are considering a .380 or .22 for carry, or all manner of off-body carry. Very few on these carry specific discussion groups are carrying full sized guns, let alone full sized guns with weighty accessories added. Weight and size, too big and too heavy are very real concerns for people that actually carry every day, day in, and day out, winter and summer. Infact I see some disengenuous posts here that go something like, "I conceal a 6" barrel N-frame revolver, why can't I shoot it in IDPA, stupid rules." The truth usually goes something like, "I concealed a 6" revolver for a couple hours, once, back in the winter of 1999, but I never had to sit down, I have never carried it all day, or in the summer. Before you get all excited and say, but but but I carry a full size, let me say that I carry a 42 oz when loaded, double stack .45ACP all day, every day, winter and summer, so it can be done, but it is one heavy, bulky son-of-a-gun, and you have to be extremely bull headed to modify your wardrobe enough to do it. It is about 31 oz unloaded, with a mag, btw. All that said, I can see why a sport, all about concealed carry, would have a size and weight limits. Just a thought, Ken Reed

Seems like the rulebook sufficiently covers this situation: CoF 13. Use concealment for scenario stages when appropriate. Exception: Police or military officers when using actual duty gear. L. Any type of filler to hide an offset. Exception – Police or military officers may use their duty rig, but ALL retention features of the holster MUST be used and all belt equipment (mace, handcuffs, etc.) must be present. What is your specific issue? Ken Reed

Mr Neck, For the record, a three doesn't help out with a FTN penalty. You have to have at least one hit in the -0 or -1 scoring area to not get a FTN. That said, I get your point in general, it can be a game of millimeters. Ken Reed

Mornin'; Just talked with a very knowledgable fellow at Briley on the phone. They need 0.850" outside diameter of barrel to put in Benelli chokes. They can put their thin chokes into my 18.5" barrel which is 0.827" outside diameter, and I can shoot slugs through it. They advised the current price is $179 with three chokes, and there is a two week turn around time. Thanks for pointing me to Briley. Ken Reed

Perfectly acceptable IDPA wise. Unadvisable because of the extra stress it puts on the extractor. Ken Reed

Trapr, Possibly, make me an offer, freeidaho at yahoo dot com. The barrel is almost new, but has some shiny spots in the bluing. It is threaded, and has a single choke installed, marked Steel Shot Ok CL. I had to modify the forestock to make it work, since I had the forestock for the 18.5" barrel. Not a difficult modification. Ken Reed

Trapr, Thanks for the kind offer! I already have a 18.5" and 24" barrel, so another 18.5 might be overkill. Thanks again ! ! ! Ken Reed

Larry, Hotdang ! ! ! Thank you Sir ! ! ! ! Ken Reed

Greetings encyclopedia of all things 3-Gun; Is there enough metal in the stock 18.5" Benelli M1S90 straight tube barrel to cut it for a choke? I tried a search on this topic but either found nothing or found everything. Thanks for your answers ! ! ! Ken Reed

Jack, There has been the same weight restriction on CDP for at least a half a decade. There is a free rulebood at IDPA Website Ken Reed

This part of the Cabella's page is troubling: Item notes This is not a hearing protection device and should not be used for noise reduction applications. Your thoughts ? ? ? Ken Reed